Lodinews.com

default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

Let’s fight for survival as a nation

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Monday, January 16, 2012 12:00 am | Updated: 6:13 am, Mon Jan 16, 2012.

It is increasingly frustrating to wake up every morning to another Obama outrage. It seems as if nobody cares. Is it the lapdog media sucking up to those with power; or have we become a nation of deadbeats reaching out for another government handout? Margaret Thatcher said it best: "Pretty soon you run out of other people's money."

Folks, we have arrived. Government has no money. They take from those who have it and buy votes from those who don't! The Democratic leadership is so corrupt, they will stop at nothing to stay in power. Republicans are so inept, they can gain no traction. That leaves the rest of us. Are we sheep being led to slaughter, or do we have the courage of our founding fathers to risk everything to combat tyranny?

The Tea Party folks have it right. We must energize the patriots. Convince our neighbors this is a fight for survival as a nation. The Islamist bombers get the headlines, but our own legislators are far more dangerous. Who is giving away your rights and freedoms? Our big war is at home, not abroad.

Do you really think the Obamas, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Dick Durban or "Chucky" Schumer care a whit about you? They want power — and lots of it. Vote these scoundrels out!

Jerry Osgood

Galt

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.

33 comments:

  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 2:03 pm on Sun, Jan 22, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Brian... I think Steve has confirmed his perspective is so irrational that it is not worth the time to have a dialogue.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 10:17 am on Fri, Jan 20, 2012.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2610

    Brian, why wouldn't I support a man who will drive a stake through the syphilitic heart of American conservatism?

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 5:50 pm on Thu, Jan 19, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2860

    Steve,

    Your remarks are getting ridiculous. Why would you support Romney thinking he's going to reverse the Reagan Revolution? Frankly, just that is an attack on him. Figure it out , Steve. In so many words, you're attacking his stance on Reaganomics, which is contrary to what you think.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 1:06 pm on Thu, Jan 19, 2012.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2610

    Romney is the best thing to happen to the GOP in 50 years.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 1:06 pm on Thu, Jan 19, 2012.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2610

    Brian, I am not attacking Romney in any way. In fact, I wholeheartedly support the man.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 1:04 pm on Thu, Jan 19, 2012.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2610

    No Brian, I wouldn't be outraged by Rubio in the VP slot. That is because I am consistent.

    You also, it seems, would not be outraged by Rubio in the VP slot. That is because you are a hypocrite.

     
  • Gary Musto posted at 10:14 am on Thu, Jan 19, 2012.

    Gary Musto Posts: 506

    January 17, 2012, President "Food Stamps" appoints his new OMB director, Jeffery Zients.

    "Jeff has superb judgement and has provided sound advise on a whole host of issues."

    Sounds like President "Food Stamps" has found his man, one thing the President and his regime failed to mention was that Jeff was a former CEO of Bain & Company.

    You remember Bain & Company, the same place Romney worked and is being criticized by the loons on the left for having a "Bain mentality."

    President "Food Stamps" has received over $80,000 in campaign donations from that evil Bain & Company since 2007 and over $27,500 last year.

    Is this corrupt President as stupid as he looks or is he just sporting an evil "Bain mentality?"


    Is this Obama WH as stupid as it looks or just plain ignorant.

    Is this Obama regime ignorant or just plain stupid.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 7:55 pm on Wed, Jan 18, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2860

    Ms. Bobin wrote:

    Excellent comments, Mr. Barrow and Mr. Schmidt.

    -There you have it folks. Ms. Bobin is about as ignorant as they come. Romney would never reverse the Reagan revolution. He embraced and advanced on it. Or does she realize Steve is being tongue in cheek? I highly doubt it.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 7:45 pm on Wed, Jan 18, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2860

    Steve,

    To attack Mitt Romney on his Bain Capital record is to attack him for being one of the few who recognized the specific economic excellence of the 1980s compared to what had come before. This is hopelessly misguided. Romney knew what great new things the Reagan Revolution would mean in practice, and he proved it in his stellar business career.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 7:41 pm on Wed, Jan 18, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2860

    Steve wrote:

    After decades of fiasco and catastrophe, Romney appears ready to reverse the Reagan Revolution and bring the GOP back into the Party of Gerald Ford.

    -Only Mr. Tongue in Cheek Schmidt could come up with a whopper like this. And what's amazing is he actually believes this junk.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 7:23 pm on Wed, Jan 18, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2860

    Steve,

    I can see where you wouldn't be outraged if Rubio gets the VP bid since you weren't. outraged when the inexperienced Obama got elected President. You never cease to amaze me with your double standards.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 6:43 am on Wed, Jan 18, 2012.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2610

    Chuckle....

    But surely a Rubio bid would outrage all those Republicans who truly and devoutly believe that a partial term in the US Senate is insufficient experience to qualify one for the Presidency....

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 8:03 pm on Tue, Jan 17, 2012.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2860

    Steve wrote:

    At this point, Newt ought to be angling for the VP slot although I suspect Romney will choose Huntsman so that he can homogenize the ticket.

    -Not even close Steve. Romney has his sights on Marco Rubio for VP.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 1:11 pm on Tue, Jan 17, 2012.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2610

    Joe Baxter wrote: In all fairness, Citizens United will benefit ALL candidates regardless of party affiliation.

    It will benefit all candidates who are in the pockets of the ultra rich and the corporations. Those who take a stand against monied interests will find themselves at a GREAT disadvantage.

     
  • Jeff Tillett posted at 12:10 pm on Tue, Jan 17, 2012.

    Jeff Tillett Posts: 555

    You're right, Joe. The democratic process will be subverted for all voters, regardless of political persuasion, by corporations and the unlimited spending brought on by Citizens United.

     
  • Joe Baxter posted at 10:46 am on Tue, Jan 17, 2012.

    Joe Baxter Posts: 1904

    In all fairness, Citizens United will benefit ALL candidates regardless of party affiliation. Although some on this thread would like you to believe it is a perk that only Republicans are reaping the results of passage.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 7:06 pm on Mon, Jan 16, 2012.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2610

    Interesting.

    Apparently the LNS software thinks "lessbian", when spelled correctly, is a swear word.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 7:05 pm on Mon, Jan 16, 2012.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2610

    South Carolina is the state where George W. Bush's campaign tried to convince people that John McCain had fathered a daughter with a black woman. Something about the state just brings out the Republican Party's true self for all to see. By the time this is over, I bet you Slick Rick Perry and "Splat" Santorum will be trying to convince people Romney is a lessbian or some other such crazy nonsense.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 5:12 pm on Mon, Jan 16, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Ms Bobin stated... Can't wait for the South Carolina blood bath next week...

    Of course... just the image and perception most have of you Ms Bobin... you look forward to blood baths... not that there will be one... but thank you for making clear your personality, perferences and character.

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 4:56 pm on Mon, Jan 16, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    After Gingrich's disappointing performance in Iowa and New Hampshire, he signaled (psychically, of course) to his Super PAC to start the brutally devastating negative Romney ads for SC. Given the evangelical right wing base in SC, it is really a toss-up whether they will support a cult member (in the Evangelical Christian view) or the serial adulterer.

    Can't wait for the South Carolina blood bath next week. I hear they have some really inventive ways of cutting candidates (truth or not) to the bone in that state.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 4:42 pm on Mon, Jan 16, 2012.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2610

    Darrell, I think Gingrich would be a liability for Romney as VP. Romney is the new face of the GOP while Gingrich peaked in 1994 and has been in a steady decline ever since. Add to that Gingrich's personal life and you essentially have a non starter. Romney has banked on his squeaky clean image, the last thing he wants to do on the campaign trail is get mired in Newt's serial infidelities.

    Romney needs to be worrying about Barack Obama, not who the next Mrs Gingrich is going to be.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 3:02 pm on Mon, Jan 16, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Steve, I think the 20 million that recently went toward gingrich and the people who contributed it may disagree with your assessment.

    As far as Gingrich for VP... Romney cannot affod to look bad in the brain department by having someone better able to articulate himself as his VP.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 2:27 pm on Mon, Jan 16, 2012.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2610

    Darrell, Gingrich reminds me of that guy in the Sixth Sense. The only person who doesn't know that Gingrich's candidacy is dead is Gingrich himself.

    At this point, Newt ought to be angling for the VP slot although I suspect Romney will choose Huntsman so that he can homogenize the ticket.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 1:38 pm on Mon, Jan 16, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Jerry... Have you ever heard the idea that one must hit bottom before they can get out of their complex problems?

    Please do not be frustrated... If Obama wins in the next election, we will hit bottom much quicker and harder than otherwise. Many people think it is inevitable we crash and burn no matter who gets elected.
    Other than Gingrich, there is not enough brain power on the “right” to make dramatic changes needed.
    Since there is no brainpower or experience in the Obama administration to lead us out of this predicament, why not elect Obama and force him to take responsibility for his disastrous policies. If Gingrich is not the candidate, I most likely will vote for Obama as I he will succeed in helping us hit bottom quickly so the pendulum can swing back sooner. Once the democrats own the crash, we can move forward.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 1:26 pm on Mon, Jan 16, 2012.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2610

    Eric, Romney has a long history of saying anything to get elected but, if you look at his actual track record, he inevitably forgets all of that political theater and swings his compass back to his time tested political heading.

    In any case, the failure of the congressional super committee has insured that there will be massive cuts to the military in coming years. Even if Romney, (or any other CIC) wanted to expand the military, the legacy of failed conservatism in the Congress will deny them the funds to do so.

    Much as one may deplore the disastrous consequences for our nation, one has to appreciate the irony inherent in the fact that the traditionally hawkish GOP has precipitated the most catastrophic defunding of our military in American history.

     
  • Kim Parigoris posted at 1:23 pm on Mon, Jan 16, 2012.

    Kim Parigoris Posts: 470

    Out of 75 votes presented to Obama as a Senator in 2007, he did not even bother to vote on 36 of them- that is 48% ! However the only bill that he actually thought was important enough was December 7, 2007, Obama introduced the Senate version of the Global Poverty Act of 2007 (S.2433).
    "To require the President to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the [U.N.] Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day."
    If enacted, how much of a financial commitment would that represent to taxpayers?
    One estimate is 0.7% of gross national product, or an additional $845 billion over 13 years in addition to existing foreign aid expenditures.
    Folks, that it his plan- and always has been- and if you can not call this redistribution of wealth, please tell me what you call it..

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 12:48 pm on Mon, Jan 16, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1591

    Steve it would be great if we saw the right swing back to more moderate stance and shut out the fringe but Romney has already stated that as President he would expand the military. We have just heard our military talking about scaling back (due to the supercommittee failure) to pre-war numbers which still makes it as expensive as the next ten largest military forces combined. Maybe It is just election talk but this sounds like more Bush bravado.

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 12:14 pm on Mon, Jan 16, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Actually, I am outraged that, during the current administration, the Supreme Court voted in favor of Citizens United and paved the way for unlimited corporate, union, etc. funding of Super PAC's that are thinly veiled parallels to the individual candidates' official campaigns.

    According to a recent article in TIME, Super PAC's and candidates are barely maintaining their required distance. The head of Gingrich's Super PAC claims he gets psychic messages from Newt about the direction he wants his campaign to go and Romney boldly appears at fundraising events for his Super PAC. Staff changes from being employed by the campaign to the Super PAC and back again faster than it takes to change one's underwear - and the dealings are no doubt just as dirty as that laundry.

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 11:56 am on Mon, Jan 16, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Excellent comments, Mr. Barrow and Mr. Schmidt.

    Mr. Osgood wrote: "It is increasingly frustrating to wake up every morning to another Obama outrage."

    Where are all the regular right-wing nuts in this forum who always mock and DEMAND a detailed explanation or these types of blanket statements?

    What are the daily outrages, Mr. Osgood? I really don't expect a response, so I'll just make the presumption that Mr. Osgood is outraged that he wakes up daily in an America where Barack Obama is STILL the president.

    Write back when you have something of substance (backed by facts) to say - PLEASE!

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 9:48 am on Mon, Jan 16, 2012.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2610

    You know Eric, I am honestly encouraged by the ascendancy of Mitt Romney in these primaries. People forget that there was a time before Ronald Reagan when the Republican Party was not the sole property of the rabid conservative fringe. After decades of fiasco and catastrophe, Romney appears ready to reverse the Reagan Revolution and bring the GOP back into the Party of Gerald Ford.

    The time has come for America to back away from the brink and to work together in the spirit of compromise.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 8:35 am on Mon, Jan 16, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1591

    Jerry I do understand your frustration, I've been watching the repubs debate and primary and wow you guys are in a world of hurt. It appears the Tea Party has ripped the Grand Old Party apart. I got to give a shout out to Newt he is single handily writing Obama's reelection plan.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 8:30 am on Mon, Jan 16, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1591

    Jerry sounds like a call to arms maybe you can get Mr West and William Van Amber Fields along with there obedient minions and go see if you boys can take back this country.Give FOX News a call they may want to televise the revolution. Maybe before you march on Washington you could let us know exactly what rights and freedom you are without today that you had three years ago. It appears it is the far right that has elevated Obama to walk on water status do you really believe the President can so profoundly change this country, he could barely get congress to fund the existing government, I think the Bill of Rights is pretty safe. Letters like this is why the far right appears paranoid and delusional.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 1:12 am on Mon, Jan 16, 2012.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2610

    Jerry, I know you are just going to LOVE your life as a Romney Republican!

     

Recent Comments

Posted 5 hours ago by Jeff Tillett.

Posted 6 hours ago by Angie McDaniel.

article: Letter: Leaders to blame for police dea…

How about following the law in return for a little respect from the cops? How about acknowledging the fact that our police risk their lives…

More...

Posted 6 hours ago by Brian Dockter.

article: Letter: Leaders to blame for police dea…

Thomas stated: Is there no holiday for the malcontents? I mean it's xmas. -Exactly, Or do you not consider the protestors who vandalized…

More...

Posted 6 hours ago by Brian Dockter.

Posted 6 hours ago by Brian Dockter.

article: Letter: Leaders to blame for police dea…

Shane, Has the thought ever crossed your mind that many of these officers were in fear of their civil rights being violated and they had t…

More...

Video

Popular Stories

Poll

Vote on the biggest local story in 2014: See poll below

It has been an eventful year in Lodi, from the antics of a wild turkey named Tom Kettleman to the announced closure of the General Mills plant. What do you see as the biggest story of the year?

Total Votes: 270

Loading…

Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists